Odds and ends WPA

WPA 2010 wrapped up this morning. I enjoyed the conference. It’s a good size: about three hundred people, I think. That’s big enough to see lots of fellow travelers, and small enough to have long conversations quite a few of them–which is the point of conferences, after all. Highlights:

  • Good sessions. I didn’t skip a single time slot. I enjoyed Bump Halbritter’s talk, which used Donald Murray to talk about what it means to be innovative (rather than just saying, hey, what I’m doing is innovative). The research project Shirley Rose, Barbara L’Eplattenier, and Lisa Mastrangelo are starting looks fascinating–updating surveys about WPAs from the 1980s. Several interesting discussion sessions focusing on dual enrollment. And I was very interested in the MA in Teaching Writing Michelle Sidler and Elizabeth Woodsworth are developing at Auburn and Auburn Montgomery.
  • On the other hand: I went to (part of a) session which began with the presenter complaining about the hotel, apologizing for the poor quality of the talk, and distributing a handout which approached something completely different than the program. I suppose I should be used to this by now, but it still irks me. I left and found something better.
  • My panel, with Jeff and Joe Bizup, went well, and I had good follow-up conversations with John Brereton and Jim McDonald. More on that soon; I’ve got more ideas about the slow numbers we’re seeing at Western–given that many others are dealing with similar issues.
  • Time well spent with Susanmarie Harrington, Duane Roen, Chuck Paine, Charlie Lowe, and many others. I also met Dylan Dryer and Carra Lee Hood, both recently published in Composition Forum.
  • No running–I’m still resting my feet and hoping I don’t have a serious case of plantar fascitis. Until today, I’ve had no symptoms, but this morning my right foot is bugging me for no apparent reason. I rode a stat bike once, and I’m getting home early enough today to ride as well.
  • As usual, traveling with Jeff suits me. We both get up early, and we both like to eat. Thursday we headed to Monk’s Cafe right after we hit Philly. Mussels, belgians, sour ales, yum. We split veal sausage and duck sandwiches. Walking back to the hotel, I spotted a Russian River handle at Tria. It turned out to be Russian River Registration. Jeff nearly leapt over the bar. “We’ll take two!” Delicious.
  • Given that I seem to have survived eating red meat, I may have to try some more soon. It’s been a while.
  • Friday, the WPA organizers wisely skip hosting a meal, so everyone gets to enjoy the city. I went to Eulogy and Triumph with Jeff and Michael Day. Russian River Consecration at the former, and IPX, a good double IPA, at the latter.
  • We left the hotel this morning at 9.10am. Thirty minutes later, we were at the airport and through security. Wow.

Kudos to Linda Adler-Kassner, Eli Goldblatt, and the other CWPA folks involved; they did a fine job. I don’t remember hearing where next year’s conference is. But I expect to be there.

This entry was posted in Beer, Composition, Food, Running, Travel and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Odds and ends WPA

  1. Clancy says:

    Cool. I’d be interested to know what you and Jim talked about (and, obviously, if my name came up). I don’t think he knows that you and I know each other.

  2. Clancy says:

    OH, and next year’s WPA is in Baton Rouge, about an hour from Lafayette. Maybe you and Jonathan can visit.

  3. cbd says:

    Clancy, no–about two seconds after Jim and I parted ways, I thought, DUH, that Lafayette. Mostly, we talked about dual enrollment–Jim had a good comment at a session on enrollment in general, and said ULL was working on its own dual enrollment plans. I’d love to hear more from you and/or Jim–thanks!

    I saw Irv Peckham a couple times. Surprised he wasn’t handing out buttons or something. Apparently, the next six years are already planned:

    2011-Baton Rouge
    2012-Albuquerque
    2013-Savannah
    2014-Normal
    2015-Boise
    2016-Raleigh
    2017-Knoxville

  4. Susanmarie says:

    Delurking to agree that it was indeed a conference full of good conversations. For me, it was a good range of conversations–some with people I expected to see, on topics I could have predicted; others with new folks on new topics. A good experience all around.

Comments are closed.